alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021072EN.01002402.xml

| 1.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Marc Folschette and Others v Commission

(Case T-884/19) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Investigation by OLAF - Information technology contract - Corruption - Trading in influence - Final report recommending the bringing of criminal proceedings - Final acquittal by a criminal court - Period of limitation - Sufficiently serious infringement of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)

(2021/C 72/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Marc Folschette (Leudelange, Luxembourg), Tetyana Grygorenko (Leudelange), Professional Business Solutions SA (Leudelange) (represented by: N. Bauer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and F. Blanc, Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicants claim to have suffered as a result of the conduct of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) in the context of an internal investigation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Marc Folschette, Tetyana Grygorenko and Professional Business Solutions SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Marc Folschette, Tetyana Grygorenko and Professional Business Solutions SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 496 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 496

To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act to repeal a duplicative 
         program relating to inspection and grading of catfish.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2011

Mr. McCain (for himself and Mr. Coburn) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, 
                        Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act to repeal a duplicative 
         program relating to inspection and grading of catfish.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF DUPLICATIVE PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Effective on the date of enactment of the Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act (7 U.S.C. 8701 et seq.), section 11016 of 
that Act (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2130) and the amendments made 
by that section are repealed.
    (b) Application.--The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 
1621 et seq.) and the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) shall be applied and administered as if section 11016 of the 
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2130) 
and the amendments made by that section had not been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1  Certification of Periodic Report   Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of Renaissance Learning, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that, to the undersigneds knowledge:  (1)
     the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
     the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
   Dated:May 7, 2010/s/ Terrance D. PaulName: Terrance D. Paul
Title: Chief Executive Officer
   THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE FILED BY THE COMPANY FOR PURPOSES OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.


---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 878 

To amend section 520 of the Housing Act of 1949 to revise the requirements 

for areas to be considered as rural areas for purposes of such Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 4, 2011 

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska introduced the following bill; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend section 520 of the Housing Act of 1949 to revise 

the requirements for areas to be considered as rural 

areas for purposes of such Act. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Rural Housing Preser5 vation Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF RURAL AREA. 

7 The second sentence of section 520 of the Housing 

8 Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490) is amended by striking: 

9 ‘‘1990 or 2000 decennial census shall continue to be so 

10 classified until the receipt of data from the decennial cenVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:09 May 05, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S878.IS S878

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 878 IS

1 sus in the year 2010’’ and inserting ‘‘1990, 2000, or 2010 

2 decennial census shall continue to be so classified until the 

3 receipt of data from the decennial census in the year 

4 2020’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
# C_2021072EN.01002201.xml

| 1.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Enoport v EUIPO — Miguel Torres (CABEÇA DE TOIRO)

(Case T-811/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark CABEÇA DE TOIRO - Earlier EU word mark SANGRE DE TORO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 72/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Enoport — Produção de Bebidas Lda (Rio Maior, Portugal) (represented by: J. Alves Coelho, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Miguel Torres, SA (Vilafranca del Penedès, Spain) (represented by: M. Ceballos Rodríguez and M. Robledo McClymont, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 September 2019 (Case R 394/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres and Enoport — Produção de Bebidas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Enoport — Produção de Bebidas Lda to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Enoport — Produção de Bebidas Lda to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 36, 3.2.2020.

---
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification of Periodic Report**     Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officerof Renaissance Learning, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to the undersigned’sknowledge: (1) the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: August 8, 2005                                                     /s/ John R. Hickey   Name:  John R. Hickey   Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer   THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE FILED BY THE COMPANY FOR PURPOSES OF THE SECURITIESEXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 16 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 16

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
       for an event to celebrate the birthday of King Kamehameha.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 10, 2011

    Mr. Akaka (for himself and Mr. Inouye) submitted the following 
       concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
       for an event to celebrate the birthday of King Kamehameha.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR EVENT TO CELEBRATE BIRTHDAY OF 
              KING KAMEHAMEHA.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used for an 

              

event on June 5, 2011, to celebrate the birthday of King Kamehameha.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
ceremony described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.
                                 <all>
```
#### Krista LEWELLYN, o.b.o. J.L. and L.L., Todd Lewellyn, o.b.o. J.L. and L.L., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SARASOTA COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-12428.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 29, 2011.

Kelli Jo Laker Leaf, Kelli Leaf, Esq., Atlanta, GA, Matthew W. Dietz, Law Of*447fice of Matthew Dietz, Miami, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Edward K. Dubose, Arthur S. Hardy, Matthews, Eastmoore, Hardy, Crauwels & Garcia, P.A., Sarasota, FL, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before MARCUS, WILSON and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

At issue today is an appeal by Krista and Todd Lewellyn from the district court’s order granting final summary judgment in favor of Sarasota County School Board. The Lewellyns had alleged that the School Board violated: (1) the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400*et seq.,*by failing to provide their sons J.L. and L.L. .with a free and appropriate public education; (2) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1978, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, by discriminating and retaliating against J.L. and L.L. on the basis of their disabilities; and (3) J.L.’s and L.L.’s due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. The district court rejected each of these claims. After thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the district court based on its well-reasoned opinion of December 29, 2009.

AFFIRMED.
#### M. HARTLEY CO., Appellant, v. EVANS, Respondent, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department,

November 22, 1907.)

Action by the M. Hartley Company against Thomas E. Evans, impleaded. W. F. Goldbeck, for appellant. R. L. Moffett, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Hugo LUCERO-SIMENTAL, also known as, Mario Reyes-Simental, also known as, Rudolfo Simental, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-40274

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 6, 2009.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Alfred H. Montelongo, Montelongo & Montelongo, Corpus Christi, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Victor Hugo Lucero-Simental appeals from his conviction of illegal reentry following deportation. Lucero-Simental contends solely that his ninety-six-month sentence was unreasonable.

Lucero-Simental did not object to his sentence or raise the same arguments in the district court that he advanced in favor of the sentence he requested. His contentions arguably should be reviewed for plain *87error. *See United States v. Willingham,*497 F.3d 541, 544 (5th Cir.2007) (stating that arguments not presented to the district court are reviewed for plain error). *But see United States v. Gomez-Herrera,*523 F.3d 554, 564 (5th Cir.2008) (declining to decide the standard of review when the defendant failed to object to the procedural reasonableness of his sentence), *cert. denied,*— U.S.—, 129 S.Ct. 624, 172 L.Ed.2d 617 (2008).

The sentence of ninety-six months was within Lucero-Simental’s guideline sentencing range and therefore is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness. *See United States v. Campos-Maldonado,*531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir.2008) (per curiam), *cert. denied,*— U.S.—, 129 S.Ct. 328, 172 L.Ed.2d 236 (2008). The district court provided sufficient reasons for the sentence, addressing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), *see Rita v. United States,*551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007); accordingly, Lucero-Simental has failed to demonstrate error, plain or otherwise.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
# C_2020010EN.01002301.xml

| 13.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/23

---

Appeal brought on 2 September 2019 by Mr Klaus Nonnemacher against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 June 2019 in Case T-390/18 Klaus Nonnemacher v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

(Case C-660/19 P)

(2020/C 10/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Klaus Nonnemacher (represented by: C. Rohnke, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Paul Ingram

By order of 19 November 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear his own costs.

---
# Iris Oifigiúil C 88A/24 F

| | ISSN 1977-107X |
| --- | --- |
| Iris Oifigiúil
  an Aontais Eorpaigh | C 88A |
| | |
| An t-eagrán Gaeilge | Faisnéis agus Fógraí | 6524 Feabhra 2022 |

ISSN 1977-107X

Iris Oifigiúil

an Aontais Eorpaigh

C 88A

An t-eagrán Gaeilge

Faisnéis agus Fógraí

6524 Feabhra 2022

---

| Clár | Leathanach |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Fógairtí |
| | NÓSANNA IMEACHTA RIARACHÁIN |
| | An Coimisiún Eorpach |
| 2022/C 88 A/01 | Fógra lena leasaítear Comhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) — Foilsiú folúntais d’fheidhm Stiúrthóra Feidhmiúcháin ar Chomhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) (Gníomhaire Sealadach — Grád AD 14) — COM/2022/20075 ( IO C 48 A, 31.1.2022 ) | 1 |

Clár

Leathanach

V   Fógairtí

NÓSANNA IMEACHTA RIARACHÁIN

An Coimisiún Eorpach

2022/C 88 A/01

Fógra lena leasaítear Comhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) — Foilsiú folúntais d’fheidhm Stiúrthóra Feidhmiúcháin ar Chomhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) (Gníomhaire Sealadach — Grád AD 14) — COM/2022/20075 ( IO C 48 A, 31.1.2022 )

( IO C 48 A, 31.1.2022 )

1

---

| GA | |
| --- | --- |

GA

---

V Fógairtí

NÓSANNA IMEACHTA RIARACHÁIN

An Coimisiún Eorpach

| 24.2.2022 | GA | Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh | CA 88/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2022

GA

Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh

CA 88/1

---

Fógra lena leasaítear Comhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) — Foilsiú folúntais d’fheidhm Stiúrthóra Feidhmiúcháin ar Chomhghnóthas an Tionscnaimh um Shláinte Nuálach (IHI JU) (Gníomhaire Sealadach — Grád AD 14) — COM/2022/20075

(
  Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh C 48 A an 31 Eanáir 2022
  )

(2022/C 88 A/01)

Ar leathanach 5, “Dáta deiridh”, an chéad mhír:

| in ionad: | “Is é an 28 Feabhra 2022, 12.00 meán lae, am na Bruiséile, an sprioc-am le clárú. Ní féidir clárú ina dhiaidh sin.”, |
| --- | --- |

in ionad:

“Is é an 28 Feabhra 2022, 12.00 meán lae, am na Bruiséile, an sprioc-am le clárú. Ní féidir clárú ina dhiaidh sin.”,

| léitear: | “Is é an 14 Márta 2022, 12.00 meán lae, am na Bruiséile, an sprioc-am le clárú. Ní féidir clárú ina dhiaidh sin.”. |
| --- | --- |

léitear:

léitear:

“Is é an 14 Márta 2022, 12.00 meán lae, am na Bruiséile, an sprioc-am le clárú. Ní féidir clárú ina dhiaidh sin.”.

---
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

KATHY GERMAN

, Appellant,

v.

JACQUELINE CHRISTIAN a/k/a JACQUELYN CHRISTIAN as Guardian

of BRYANT JONES a/k/a BRIAN JONES and JEREMIAH POOLER

, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 2 2

- 71

[ August 10, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seven teenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Kenneth Gillespie , Judge; L.T. Case No. PRC 19

- 0004302

(62J)

.

Kathy German, Fort Lauderdale, pro se.

Nathaniel E. Green of Nathaniel E. Green, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for

appellees.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

K LINGENSMITH

, C.J., C ONNER and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 23.2

               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Act") provides that if part of
a registration statement at the time it becomes effective contains an untrue
statement of material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make
the statements therein not misleading, any person acquiring a security pursuant
to such registration statement (unless it is provided at the time of such
acquisition such person knew of such untruth or omission) may assert a claim
against, among others, an accountant who has consented to be named or having
certified any part of the registration statement or as having prepared or
certified any report for the use in connection with the registration statement.

This form 10-K is incorporated by reference into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statement File no. 333-07231, File no. 333-31785 and File No.
333-31787.

Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") resigned as the Company's independent Certified
Public Accountant on June 17, 2002. The Company has not been able to obtain,
after reasonable efforts, the written consent of Andersen to the inclusion into
this Form 10-K of Andersen's audit reports with respect to the Company's
financial statements. Under these circumstances, Rule 437 under the Act permits
us to file this Form 10-K. However, as a result Andersen will not have any
liability under Section 11(a) of the Act for any untrue statements of a material
fact contained in the financial statements audited by Andersen or any omission
of a material fact required to be stated therein. Accordingly, you would be
unable to assert a claim against Andersen under Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         780
<SECURITIES>                                   19,351
<RECEIVABLES>                                  7,630
<ALLOWANCES>                                   325
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               31,099
<PP&E>                                         6,674
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,487
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 35,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,284
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       95
<OTHER-SE>                                     31,591
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   35,286
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,401
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  12,105
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               9,068
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (488)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                716
<INCOME-TAX>                                   280
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            436
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   436
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.04


</TABLE>
exv10w1





Exhibit 10.1

December 18, 2009




The Board of Directors of FreightCar America, Inc.

Two North Riverside Plaza

Suite 1250

Chicago, Illinois 60606




Ladies and Gentlemen:




     In accordance with the Third Amended and Restated By-Laws (the “By-Laws”) of FreightCar
America, Inc. (the “Corporation”), I hereby tender my resignation as a member of the board of
directors (the “Board”) of the Corporation, provided that this resignation shall be effective upon,
and only in the event that:



     (a)(i) a majority of the votes of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the
meeting and entitled to vote in an uncontested election in which I am a nominee are designated to
be “withheld” from, or are voted “against,” my election and (ii) the Board accepts this resignation
following such election; or



     (b)(i) I experience a change in my principal employment status, other than retirement, and
(ii) the Board accepts this resignation following such change in status.



     This resignation shall be irrevocable to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Very truly yours,

 	 
	 	
 	 
	 	Edward J. Whalen
EXHIBIT 21.1



NEXTMEDIA OPERATING. INC.

REGISTRANTS SUBSIDIARIES

AT DECEMBER 31, 2004



|                                  |  |                              
|--------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Subsidiary                        |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|NM Licensing LLC                  |  | Delaware                     
|NextMedia Franchising, Inc.       |  | Delaware                     
|NextMedia Outdoor, Inc.           |  | Delaware                     
|NextMedia Outdoor LLC             |  | Delaware                     
|Crickett, Ltd.                    |  | Pennsylvania                 
|NextMedia Northern Colorado, Inc. |  | Delaware